[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC -mass rock

Anne-Karoline Distel annekadistel at web.de
Fri Apr 2 15:21:27 UTC 2021

Just to be clear - the rock itself is not sacred, it was just safer to
celebrate mass in the open air with guards posted around rather than
meeting in a barn or church ruin, because you could just flee across the
fields or into the woods in case British soldiers were approaching to
avoid being killed.

And I haven't found out whether there might still be annual mass being
said in some locations, especially when there is a holy well nearby.

On 02/04/2021 13:53, Paul Allen wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Apr 2021 at 13:30, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
> <tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:tagging at openstreetmap.org>> wrote:
>     to clarify:
>     I am 100% fine with tagging existing and visible remains/ruins
> So you won't have a problem with tagging a mass rock. Which tags get
> used are open to discussion, but even you have to agree that if the
> rock is still there, it can be mapped.
>     I am not accepting mapping things of completely and utterly
>     gone, without any trace whatsoever - and without danger of
>     accidental remapping.
> The rocks are still there.  And can be mapped as natural=rock
> (or bare_rock or whatever).  Plus some other tags.
> Actually, a rock doesn't have to have been used for masses to be
> sacred.  And it may still be in use.  And it's mappable.
> http://stdogmaels.org/the-blessing-stone-and-landing-stage/
> <http://stdogmaels.org/the-blessing-stone-and-landing-stage/>
> If we come up with a sensible set of tags for holy rocks, I'll
> map it.
> --
> Paul
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210402/14a4adf8/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list